This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
Homosexuality - biological, or a choice?
Scroll to see replies
Nobody is 100% straight.
And this question is a false dichotomy in a sense. It as much of a choice for some people as it is to obey a particular religion. You can't choose which religion you think is true but you can put yourself in a position such that you will make it more likely that one looks true over the others for you. That said, some people are born homosexual, but again it's not permanent, they can change, become bi, become asexual or become heterosexual. The same can happen to "born heterosexuals".
And this question is a false dichotomy in a sense. It as much of a choice for some people as it is to obey a particular religion. You can't choose which religion you think is true but you can put yourself in a position such that you will make it more likely that one looks true over the others for you. That said, some people are born homosexual, but again it's not permanent, they can change, become bi, become asexual or become heterosexual. The same can happen to "born heterosexuals".
Original post by tazarooni89
Having said that, because of heterosexuality's in reproduction, and the influence of evolution, I'd say that it's quite likely that most people at least have a strong genetic predisposition towards becoming heterosexual. Perhaps environmental factors influence whether or not heterosexuality will manifest itself or not, but we know that in a majority of cases it will.
Having said that, because of heterosexuality's in reproduction, and the influence of evolution, I'd say that it's quite likely that most people at least have a strong genetic predisposition towards becoming heterosexual. Perhaps environmental factors influence whether or not heterosexuality will manifest itself or not, but we know that in a majority of cases it will.
Possibly we have both...
Perhaps it works like this, being strongly sexually active achieves more babies, but females having babies at too young an age is culturally a bad thing (humans unlike other animals need a long education period) . Thus perhaps homosexuality - (as per ancient greece) was a way to develop an advanced stable civilisation without over population ...
Thus homosexuality is genetically a good thing (in evolutionary thinking) in creating advanced cultures that wipe out less advanced cultures. Thus, those societies that are left, have some aspects that are strongly homosexual.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by tazarooni89
Possibly, but again not necessarily.
My point here is that, a human mind is such a complicated thing that you often can't just take one aspect of someone's personality and say "We're 100% sure that this is entirely caused by X".
Having said that, because of heterosexuality's in reproduction, and the influence of evolution, I'd say that it's quite likely that most people at least have a strong genetic predisposition towards becoming heterosexual. Perhaps environmental factors influence whether or not heterosexuality will manifest itself or not, but we know that in a majority of cases it will.
My point here is that, a human mind is such a complicated thing that you often can't just take one aspect of someone's personality and say "We're 100% sure that this is entirely caused by X".
Having said that, because of heterosexuality's in reproduction, and the influence of evolution, I'd say that it's quite likely that most people at least have a strong genetic predisposition towards becoming heterosexual. Perhaps environmental factors influence whether or not heterosexuality will manifest itself or not, but we know that in a majority of cases it will.
Well, this is an opinion, and obviously I can't call it wrong because it may well be more truthful than mine.
However, separating the two sexualities in two categories (one mostly genetic, the other mostly on environmental factors) doesn't work in my books.
As you say, heterosexuality may be more imminently genetic, due to its importance in reproduction.
Well, why can't homosexuality be equally genetic, due to its importance in, say, controlling human numbers? I actually find this theory quite good, in that homosexuality may be nature's weapon to control the already unsustainable human population.
As you know, the food chain works in many ways to keep species in check (well, before humans started destroying this relationship anyway). Why can't homosexuality be another natural measure to control our numbers?
This theory is only one of the many, but I think it's good enough to notion that environmental factors, whilst definitely important, do not dictate our sexuality.
Original post by ScrewExams
I have nothing against Gay people themselves - live and let live. however I am a Muslim, and as one I cannot condone their actions as I deem them unnatural - essentially you are going against nature. but that's just my opinion. so where does homosexuality come from (talking non religiously) is it something people are born with, or are people brought up that way, or is it ultimately just a choice, and anyone can be gay?
All thoughts welcome
All thoughts welcome
It is not a choice. Why would anyone choose to be gay? Especially when you see the levels on homophobia about. We don't know what causes it but it isn't a choice, it will either be genetic or genetic + environment.
You say it is unnatural. Why? What makes some unnatural? Many species have homosexuals (in fact the "gayest" species on the planet is bats). Some species even have gay adoptions. There are a few instances where a gay penguin couple will look after a baby all by themselves as if it was their own. I don't see how you can say that isn't natural? It's counter intuitive in terms of the biological purpose of life but it does't make it go against nature.
Something not being biological doesn't mean it's a choice, and homosexuality is clearly involuntary.
Original post by ScrewExams
I have nothing against Gay people themselves - live and let live. however I am a Muslim, and as one I cannot condone their actions as I deem them unnatural - essentially you are going against nature. but that's just my opinion. so where does homosexuality come from (talking non religiously) is it something people are born with, or are people brought up that way, or is it ultimately just a choice, and anyone can be gay?
All thoughts welcome
All thoughts welcome
Your computer is 'unnatural', yet you are still using it.
Original post by Little Toy Gun
Except shoes were designed by humans, humans were not.
If you want an argument from design, you will first need to establish that humans were indeed 'designed'. Some people may find a cucumber a good masturbator, but that doesn't mean it was 'designed' to be a masturbator.
No, just no.
It does, otherwise it would not remain in existence. And I didn't generalise findings from animal studies to human beings, so perhaps you should take some more English classes before responding. It makes perfect evolutionary sense for homosexuality to remain in existence - only until recently have humans started to have fewer children, but it has always been the case that both parents might need to spend time outside of caring for their children for the survival of the family. Thus, communities with people who don't reproduce would have a better chance of passing on to their genes because more carers would be available to take care of the children. Whether this means homosexuality might disappear in the future in not known, and this is only one possible explanation for it.
Evolution is not something for you to 'believe in'. It is observable and forms the basis of all things biology. The fact that you don't 'believe in' it takes away all your credibility in talking about biology, and explains your foolish arguments trying to twist 'biology' into your favour, because you don't understand it at all.
I will spend no more time on you. Have fun 'disbelieving' evolution - makes sure you don't take medicine, they are developed on the basis of evolution.
Ahaha, where is all this hostility coming from? calm down this is supposed to a leisurely discussion, and i'm sorry if i offended you in any way (even though i dont know what i might have said to trigger such an emotional response!)
If you want an argument from design, you will first need to establish that humans were indeed 'designed'. Some people may find a cucumber a good masturbator, but that doesn't mean it was 'designed' to be a masturbator.
No, just no.
It does, otherwise it would not remain in existence. And I didn't generalise findings from animal studies to human beings, so perhaps you should take some more English classes before responding. It makes perfect evolutionary sense for homosexuality to remain in existence - only until recently have humans started to have fewer children, but it has always been the case that both parents might need to spend time outside of caring for their children for the survival of the family. Thus, communities with people who don't reproduce would have a better chance of passing on to their genes because more carers would be available to take care of the children. Whether this means homosexuality might disappear in the future in not known, and this is only one possible explanation for it.
Evolution is not something for you to 'believe in'. It is observable and forms the basis of all things biology. The fact that you don't 'believe in' it takes away all your credibility in talking about biology, and explains your foolish arguments trying to twist 'biology' into your favour, because you don't understand it at all.
I will spend no more time on you. Have fun 'disbelieving' evolution - makes sure you don't take medicine, they are developed on the basis of evolution.
Ahaha, where is all this hostility coming from? calm down this is supposed to a leisurely discussion, and i'm sorry if i offended you in any way (even though i dont know what i might have said to trigger such an emotional response!)
firstly, there is something called inference, william paley proposed a famous 'design argument' - its basically goes; ( ":" means we can infer from the object)
watch : watch designer : : universe : universe designer
so following this logic Humans : human designer. you cannot tell me that design is not present in everyday life. you are typing right now- your hands have certainly been designed to pick things up and use objects in a thousand divers ways!
secondly, the theory of the 'carers' in a community is a good one, i will do my own research on this (never heard of it 'till now)
as for your point about evolution: Well of course its something you believe in! you can choose to believe that we have developed from apes over millions of years, or you can choose to believe that we descend from Adam and eve. Dis-believing in evolution does not take away from the scientific credibility of my posts. I'm not trying to twist biology - Im just using biological evidence to explain why i have this opinion. i actually have a pretty good understanding of biology.
Original post by Munrot07
It is not a choice. Why would anyone choose to be gay? Especially when you see the levels on homophobia about. We don't know what causes it but it isn't a choice, it will either be genetic or genetic + environment.
You say it is unnatural. Why? What makes some unnatural? Many species have homosexuals (in fact the "gayest" species on the planet is bats). Some species even have gay adoptions. There are a few instances where a gay penguin couple will look after a baby all by themselves as if it was their own. I don't see how you can say that isn't natural? It's counter intuitive in terms of the biological purpose of life but it does't make it go against nature.
You say it is unnatural. Why? What makes some unnatural? Many species have homosexuals (in fact the "gayest" species on the planet is bats). Some species even have gay adoptions. There are a few instances where a gay penguin couple will look after a baby all by themselves as if it was their own. I don't see how you can say that isn't natural? It's counter intuitive in terms of the biological purpose of life but it does't make it go against nature.
I would choose to be gay from time to time. It sounds quite a romantic life style. It depends on what was on the telly and how bored i was.
Its not a choice.
Who would choose to be gay?
Biological? Perhaps.
Mental illness? Perhaps. And I don't say that to offend but there must be something not quite right with the wiring in their brains if the natural desire to procreate is not apparent.
But you know what as long as it doesn't affect you as disgusting as you or I may find it who cares about what makes someone else happy.
Despite this not being offensive I'm sure the liberal mods will delete this soon but hey this is my view. Gays can have their opinions why can't I?
Who would choose to be gay?
Biological? Perhaps.
Mental illness? Perhaps. And I don't say that to offend but there must be something not quite right with the wiring in their brains if the natural desire to procreate is not apparent.
But you know what as long as it doesn't affect you as disgusting as you or I may find it who cares about what makes someone else happy.
Despite this not being offensive I'm sure the liberal mods will delete this soon but hey this is my view. Gays can have their opinions why can't I?
Original post by ScrewExams
i told you already - animals cannot be generalised to humans!
natural does mean no human interference, your right there. however when i meant that gay sex is unnatural, i mean that it can do more harm than good. infact, statistical analysis has shown that the percentage of gay males receiving std's when having sex is higher than that of straight sex.
imagine if we shoved some humans on an island, and we left them to their own devices. would there be gay people eventually?
when i say natural, i mean in terms of design - a pencil is designed to use with the hand, and using it with ur feet is possible, but very hard and it doesnt produce the same results.
As for your comment about school - im studying for AS levels at the moment. im going to ignore the underlying hostility; this is supposed to be a leisurely discussion and there is no need for that
natural does mean no human interference, your right there. however when i meant that gay sex is unnatural, i mean that it can do more harm than good. infact, statistical analysis has shown that the percentage of gay males receiving std's when having sex is higher than that of straight sex.
imagine if we shoved some humans on an island, and we left them to their own devices. would there be gay people eventually?
when i say natural, i mean in terms of design - a pencil is designed to use with the hand, and using it with ur feet is possible, but very hard and it doesnt produce the same results.
As for your comment about school - im studying for AS levels at the moment. im going to ignore the underlying hostility; this is supposed to be a leisurely discussion and there is no need for that
'Animals' are generalised to humans all the time in the form of biological and behavioral research... cause we are animals too.
You honestly don't believe in evolution?
As far as things go, its quite a basic piece of irrefutable knowledge you should actually vaguely understand.
Information is free and everywhere in today's first world countries... there really is no excuse anymore.
The thing I don't understand is when they 'find out' they're gay. Like some gay people will be straight, have sex with girls etc., but then like at age 20 they realise they're gay. If you were truely gay wouldn't you have always liked men? I know not all gay people fall into this scenario.
Original post by RtGOAT
Its not a choice.
Who would choose to be gay?
Biological? Perhaps.
Mental illness? Perhaps. And I don't say that to offend but there must be something not quite right with the wiring in their brains if the natural desire to procreate is not apparent.
But you know what as long as it doesn't affect you as disgusting as you or I may find it who cares about what makes someone else happy.
Despite this not being offensive I'm sure the liberal mods will delete this soon but hey this is my view. Gays can have their opinions why can't I?
Who would choose to be gay?
Biological? Perhaps.
Mental illness? Perhaps. And I don't say that to offend but there must be something not quite right with the wiring in their brains if the natural desire to procreate is not apparent.
But you know what as long as it doesn't affect you as disgusting as you or I may find it who cares about what makes someone else happy.
Despite this not being offensive I'm sure the liberal mods will delete this soon but hey this is my view. Gays can have their opinions why can't I?
If a straight person doesn't want kids, does that mean they have a mental illness? There's a natural desire to have sex, which same and opposite sex couples share, but not necessarily to procreate.
Original post by hellodave5
'Animals' are generalised to humans all the time in the form of biological and behavioral research... cause we are animals too.
You honestly don't believe in evolution?
As far as things go, its quite a basic piece of irrefutable knowledge you should actually vaguely understand.
Information is free and everywhere in today's first world countries... there really is no excuse anymore.
You honestly don't believe in evolution?
As far as things go, its quite a basic piece of irrefutable knowledge you should actually vaguely understand.
Information is free and everywhere in today's first world countries... there really is no excuse anymore.
Oh i fully inderstand evoultion; i choose not to believe in it for my own reasons; but this isnt the topic of this thread!
Original post by Ruh
Environmental factors are the key deciding factor as to whether one will be gay or not; genetic factors decide how receptive people are to stimuli which encourage the development of homosexual tendencies.
Where are you getting this from?
Original post by ScrewExams
Ahaha, where is all this hostility coming from? calm down this is supposed to a leisurely discussion, and i'm sorry if i offended you in any way (even though i dont know what i might have said to trigger such an emotional response!)
firstly, there is something called inference, william paley proposed a famous 'design argument' - its basically goes; ( ":" means we can infer from the object)
watch : watch designer : : universe : universe designer
so following this logic Humans : human designer. you cannot tell me that design is not present in everyday life. you are typing right now- your hands have certainly been designed to pick things up and use objects in a thousand divers ways!
secondly, the theory of the 'carers' in a community is a good one, i will do my own research on this (never heard of it 'till now)
as for your point about evolution: Well of course its something you believe in! you can choose to believe that we have developed from apes over millions of years, or you can choose to believe that we descend from Adam and eve. Dis-believing in evolution does not take away from the scientific credibility of my posts. I'm not trying to twist biology - Im just using biological evidence to explain why i have this opinion. i actually have a pretty good understanding of biology.
Sadly this is very wrong. You are acting like our "design" is perfect where in fact it really isn't. If you look at our biology there are millions of things that a "designer" would have done differently. Basic example: Our eyes are "wired" back to front. That is what causes us to have a blind spot. The optic nerves face forwards so have to go through a gap in the back of the eye to reach the brain...hence the blind spot. Squid actually have this "wired" the right way round where the nerves start at the back hence no blind spot. Are you saying that a designer would have wired our eyes back to front? There are loads of other examples, not just in humans. Plants use chlorophyll to absorb light. Chlorophyll is green so best absorbs red and blue light. However, the if you look at the sun's emission spectrum you will see that the light it produces the most of is green, the colour plants reflect. In fact a chemical such as bacteriorhodopsin (found in purple bacteria) would be far more efficient...not very good "design". I could go on but we have not been designed, if we have been the designer is just awful as all life is just filled with mistakes.
I don't understand why people argue against evolution because I'm sorry...it is true. It isn't a "well you believe what you want" it's as much a scientific fact as the rest of biology. Can you define evolution? Anyone who has any understanding in the world of biology cannot argue against the true definition of evolution (which many people don't know). Evolution is occurring and to think we came from just two people that a God created...well firstly think of the incest levels there. Not nice.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by ScrewExams
Oh i fully inderstand evoultion; i choose not to believe in it for my own reasons; but this isnt the topic of this thread!
I could understand if your education ended at primary level the reasons why you may choose not to believe in evolution (if you do indeed understand, probably cognitive dissonance between your religion saying no, I assume is determining your beliefs).
As for the topic:
Homosexuality is most likely determined multiple and interacting factors; innate biology, socialisation by caregivers in early childhood and societal expectations, and interactions between your biology and these experiences.
No one chooses to be homosexual or straight, or bi-sexual. You simply are what you are, and what you are made to be.
It is generally supposed that everyone is on a continuum of sexuality; so no one is truly 100% hetero/homosexual, rather more one than another.
Like religion - your religious beliefs are most likely determined in a very similar way to sexuality. All cognition is an interplay of many factors.
People aren't always born 100% male or female physically. People can move a long the gender scale physically to the point where some people are actually classed as intersex.
Seeing as we have physical evidence of that, why is it so hard for people to bear the idea that there are comparable scales and grey zones in people psyches? be that in gender identity or sexual preference or both or anything else.
We live in a world that's scientifically developed to the point where suggesting the mind is a digital entity with settings that are either switched on or off can only be ill formed opinion. regardless of what religion or world view you identify with, you are not a computer or a television character. difficult situations go belly up and you just have to stay calm and work with what you've got to work with.
Just my two pence.
RR
Seeing as we have physical evidence of that, why is it so hard for people to bear the idea that there are comparable scales and grey zones in people psyches? be that in gender identity or sexual preference or both or anything else.
We live in a world that's scientifically developed to the point where suggesting the mind is a digital entity with settings that are either switched on or off can only be ill formed opinion. regardless of what religion or world view you identify with, you are not a computer or a television character. difficult situations go belly up and you just have to stay calm and work with what you've got to work with.
Just my two pence.
RR
Original post by vela1
The thing I don't understand is when they 'find out' they're gay. Like some gay people will be straight, have sex with girls etc., but then like at age 20 they realise they're gay. If you were truely gay wouldn't you have always liked men? I know not all gay people fall into this scenario.
This is where environmental factors come to play in my opinion.
If someone grows in a heteronormative society, where homosexuality is being discriminated against and homosexuals suffer terrible treatment, it's is logical that s/he will do her/his best to fit the norm.
However, this never works in the end.
Though bisexuality could play a major role here as well!
There is evidence to suggest that homosexuality is caused by both genetic and epigenetic factors. What suggest that homosexuality is genetic is that people who have a gay twin are much more likely to be gay themselves compared to the general population. However, research on identical twins has shown that while one identical twin can be straight, the other can be gay. So researchers now believe that whether one develops a sexual attraction for the same sex depends on whether the gene for homosexuality was switched on or off while the foetus was developing.
As a result, not everyone who carries the gene(s) for homosexuality becomes homosexual. This would explain how these genes can be passed on to the next generation.
Here is an interesting video that explains the role of epigenetics in developing a sexual preference:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saO_RFWWVVA
As a result, not everyone who carries the gene(s) for homosexuality becomes homosexual. This would explain how these genes can be passed on to the next generation.
Here is an interesting video that explains the role of epigenetics in developing a sexual preference:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saO_RFWWVVA
Original post by ScrewExams
yes of course we go against nature everyday, but what i mean is; if everyone were gay then the human race would be extinct. i deem it unnatural as biologically speaking, a phallus is not made for an anus. yeah you can tell me that repoduction is not the sole reason for having sex, but then i can say that having sex is only because of reproduction (the reason we get sexually aroused is because of a psychological need for wanting to pregnate the other sex-reproduction) from a non religious perspective, organisms have to objectives; survival, and reporduction - these are present in every organism. this is why i mentioned biology - people get sexually aroused by different things - i myself am staight and get aorused by female, but gay people may get sexually aroused by other men?
Natural population control is a good reason why homosexuality exists. It is estimated to remain stagnant at ~10% of the global population over history.
Latest
Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
